Tunuvaa language

[Massimiliano B]

Tunuvaa is a mixed language. Here are the source languages of its adverbs:

legend:
T = Tuuraha language
T2 = document B Tuuraha language
H = Hanuvaa language
IIIL = third language
IVL = fourth language


Adverbs

almost = nanuu [ˈnanuː] IIIL
back, behind = hunuu /ˈhunuː/  H
certainly = runaanuunaa [ˌrunaːˈnuːnaː] IVL
else, otherwise = unu [ˈunu] T
especially = tuununuunu [ˌtuːnuˈnuːnu] T
exactly = aanatunaa [ˌaːnaˈtunaː] IVL
finally = vurahaahanaa [vuˌrahaːˈhanaː] IVL
forever = nutuva [nuˈtuva] IIIL
forever = tuuruhuu [tuːˈruhuː] T
forever = harahuu /haˈrahuː/ H
hardly = raanuunuu [raːˈnuːnuː] IIIL
here = raana ['ra:na] T2
how = vuuru [ˈvuːru] T
however = ruuga /ˈruːga/ H
later = tuuvu [ˈtuːvu] T
later = ruvaa /ˈruvaː/ H
maybe, perhaps = tahu [ˈtahu] IIIL
most = nutu /ˈnutu/ H
not = vuutaa ['vu:ta:] L2
now = huuru [ˈhuːru] IVL
once = huna [ˈhuna] T
only, merely = vuvuu [ˈvuvuː] IIIL
out = vagaha /vaˈgaha/ H
previously = vuuraanuu [vuːˈraːnuː] IIIL
previously = vaaunu [vaːˈunu] T
quite, rather = uruu [ˈuruː] IVL
recently = aaranu [aːˈranu] T
soon, now = uunu [ˈuːnu] T
there = nuuta ['nu:ta L2
therefore, thus = havanuu [haˈvanuː] T
tonight = nuu haahu /nuː ˈhaːhu/ H
too, so = nua /ˈnua/ H
usually = rutunaa [ruˈtunaː] IVL
where = nuuraa ['nu:ra:] L2
why = tuuna [ˈtuːna] IVL
yesterday = uutauu [uːˈtauː] T

[Linguaphile]

Tunuvaa is a mixed language. Here are the source languages of its adverbs:

legend:
T = Tuuraha language
T2 = document B Tuuraha language
H = Hanuvaa language
IIIL = third language
IVL = fourth language
...
forever = nutuva [nuˈtuva] IIIL
forever = tuuruhuu [tuːˈruhuː] T
forever = harahuu /haˈrahuː/ H

cat = nahuura [naˈhuːra] IV
cat = naguutaa [naˈguːtaː] H
cat = tutava [tuˈtava] T
cat = rununaa [ruˈnunaː] III

I'd noticed this before and wondered: for some meanings there is just one word derived from one of the four languages and for others there are two different words or even four, like for the translation of "cat" above. I'm curious whether there is any specific reason for this. Of course we have synonyms that are derived from different languages in English too: to use the "forever" and "cat" examples again, there's forever and eternal and perpetual, cat and feline and kitty and so on. So it's not a surprising feature, but it's kind of fun to see it in your conlang.
How did you decide which words would have more than one form? Or is it fairly random, since that's probably how it would appear in a natural language of this type? It seems like it would be a difficult feature to create in a way that seems natural, but the way you've done it actually does - most words with just one form, some words with two forms, a few with three, fewer with four - avoiding the temptation to just choose one word for each meaning (which is what I actually did, when I created a vocabulary for a mixed language like this years ago; I didn't think of doing it like you did) or the temptation to create four synonyms for each meaning. In a natural language it would more likely be like what you've done, some words with one form, some with two, three, or four. So I'm curious if there was a method to how you chose which words would have multiple forms, or if it was just random. (I can think of a way to not leave it to chance, but I don't know if it's what you've done.)

[Massimiliano B]

I'd noticed this before and wondered: for some meanings there is just one word derived from one of the four languages and for others there are two different words or even four, like for the translation of "cat" above. I'm curious whether there is any specific reason for this. Of course we have synonyms that are derived from different languages in English too: to use the "forever" and "cat" examples again, there's forever and eternal and perpetual, cat and feline and kitty and so on. So it's not a surprising feature, but it's kind of fun to see it in your conlang.
How did you decide which words would have more than one form? Or is it fairly random, since that's probably how it would appear in a natural language of this type? It seems like it would be a difficult feature to create in a way that seems natural, but the way you've done it actually does - most words with just one form, some words with two forms, a few with three, fewer with four - avoiding the temptation to just choose one word for each meaning (which is what I actually did, when I created a vocabulary for a mixed language like this years ago; I didn't think of doing it like you did) or the temptation to create four synonyms for each meaning. In a natural language it would more likely be like what you've done, some words with one form, some with two, three, or four. So I'm curious if there was a method to how you chose which words would have multiple forms, or if it was just random. (I can think of a way to not leave it to chance, but I don't know if it's what you've done.)

The explanation is simple: the four languages (Hanuvaa, Tuuruha, "third language", and "fourth language") that form the Tunuvaa language were created by a program that creates vocabulary. You can create more than one vocabulary with the same set of phonemes. This is what I did. But the word list that the program generates is not fixed: sometimes a term appears in the word list, other times that same term does not appear. I decided only which phonemes the languages should contain, then let the program create the words. I discarded the list of words with phonotactics that I did not like. In the end I got four languages that all shared the same phonotactic structure, which was pleasant to my ears. In the case of the language I later named "Hanuvaa," I added one more phoneme than in the other three languages (the /g/ phoneme). Sometimes, by chance, in two lists, or in three, or even in all four list of words there was the same word. Initially I wanted to work with one language, the one that sounded best to my ear (it was the Hanuvaa language), but then I decided that I could not throw away the second language, which I called Tuuruha. Later, I decided that I had to use all four languages, because their phonetic structure was so fascinating to me and they had the same phonotactics. So I decided to put all four vocabularies generated by the program together in alphabetical order, thus forming one language. This is the reason for the presence, in the resulting final list, of up to four words for the same concept.
Then I invented the story of the Tuuruha-speaking people, which were fluent also in other two languages, and later adopted also the Hanuvaa language. I still have to understand if this historical reconstruction is plausible. Maybe I will discard some synonims, or change the meaning of some of them, in order to have a list of words with different connontations.

[Linguaphile]

The explanation is simple: the four languages (Hanuvaa, Tuuruha, "third language", and "fourth language") that form the Tunuvaa language were created by a program that creates vocabulary. You can create more than one vocabulary with the same set of phonemes. This is what I did. But the word list that the program generates is not fixed: sometimes a term appears in the word list, other times that same term does not appear. I decided only which phonemes the languages should contain, then let the program create the words. I discarded the list of words with phonotactics that I did not like. In the end I got four languages that all shared the same phonotactic structure, which was pleasant to my ears. In the case of the language I later named "Hanuvaa," I added one more phoneme than in the other three languages (the /g/ phoneme). Sometimes, by chance, in two lists, or in three, or even in all four list of words there was the same word. Initially I wanted to work with one language, the one that sounded best to my ear (it was the Hanuvaa language), but then I decided that I could not throw away the second language, which I called Tuuruha. Later, I decided that I had to use all four languages, because their phonetic structure was so fascinating to me and they had the same phonotactics. So I decided to put all four vocabularies generated by the program together in alphabetical order, thus forming one language. This is the reason for the presence, in the resulting final list, of up to four words for the same concept.
Then I invented the story of the Tuuruha-speaking people, which were fluent also in other two languages, and later adopted also the Hanuvaa language. I still have to understand if this historical reconstruction is plausible. Maybe I will discard some synonims, or change the meaning of some of them, in order to have a list of words with different connontations.

Thanks! I do agree that's something fascinating about it, that they have the same phonetic structure and yet appear to be completely unrelated words. As for whether or not it is plausible, I don't know; I think it's probably unusual to have several languages with the same phonetic structure that nevertheless have lexicons that are (or appear to be at a glance) etymologically unrelated. I think I've heard of a few, but off the top of my head can't think of which languages (was it something in Micronesia? The Philippines? East Africa? I'm not sure!) Probably a plausible explanation would be that the proto-languages of each of the four languages that you're using had at least slightly (or significantly) differing sound systems in the past and at some point (maybe the point at which they were adopted into Tuuraha or maybe before that, through contact between speakers of the different languages), they were all adapted to fit into the existing sound system of Tuuraha. I.e. any syllable structures or phonemes foreign to Tuuraha (except for /g/) were modified or dropped.

[Massimiliano B]

Probably a plausible explanation would be that the proto-languages of each of the four languages that you're using had at least slightly (or significantly) differing sound systems in the past and at some point (maybe the point at which they were adopted into Tuuraha or maybe before that, through contact between speakers of the different languages), they were all adapted to fit into the existing sound system of Tuuraha. I.e. any syllable structures or phonemes foreign to Tuuraha (except for /g/) were modified or dropped.

That is exactly what I wrote in a previous post!! I copy it here:

Tunuvaa is a mixed language: about 400 years ago, four different languages of four different language groups merged into one language. This happened because the population, who spoke the Tuuraha language and was fluent also in the languages called "language III" and "language IV" (we don't know their true names; the documents of that time report only "the other languages", "the dialects other than Tuuraha"), started to speak also the Hanuvaa language. The result was the formation, at the end of a process that lasted about 200 years, of the Tunuvaa language - a name which was probably derived by the juxtaposition of the first part of the syllable Tu- of "Tuuraha" and the syllables -nuvaa of the word "Hanuvaa". Words containing the letter g are derived from the Hanuvaa language.

Perhaps my explanation was not very clear! I meant that the four different phonologies of the four languages merged into one, thus becoming the phonology of a single final resulting language.
Its phonetic and phonotactics reminds me of the Tahitian language and some languages of the "Papuan" family (Rotokas for example), which are for me very pleasant.

I have to add something: I have changed a bit the structures of the words originally generated by the computer program, in order to fit the words into the "accent rules" and "vowel rules" I decided to adopt.

[Massimiliano B]

In a previous post I wrote: "Tunuvaa is a mixed language: about 400 years ago, four different languages of four different language groups merged into one language. This happened because the population, who spoke the Tuuraha language and was fluent also in the languages called "language III" and "language IV" (we don't know their true names; the documents of that time report only "the other languages", "the dialects other than Tuuraha"), started to speak also the Hanuvaa language. The result was the formation, at the end of a process that lasted about 200 years, of the Tunuvaa language - a name which was probably derived by the juxtaposition of the first part of the syllable Tu- of "Tuuraha" and the syllables -nuvaa of the word "Hanuvaa". Words containing the letter g are derived from the Hanuvaa language.
We know exactly what was the original language to which each word of the Tunuvaa language belonged to, since a document of the late Tuuraha period reports a complete list of words indicating exactly the languages to which they originally belong to. However, the words in the lists had already undergone the phonetic changes that had adapted them to the phonological structure of the Tuuraha language.
T2 indicates a different document reporting only few words of the Tuuraha language that were not included in the main document."

Now I have to add here some informations. The grammar of the Tunuvaa language is the grammar of the Tuuraha language. The other three languages gave to the Tunuvaa language only some vocabulary and only few grammatical features. But in a library was found an old book, dated around the year 1700, which contains a grammar and a vocabulary list of an old language which is the mother of the Tuuraha language. The book was written in an old form of the Tunuvaa language.
I will post here a grammar of the mother of the Tuuraha language, which is exactly like the grammar of the Latin language. (...if I'll have the force to do that!)

The idea behind the Tunuvaa language is that I want to explore the possibility that a natural language may contain a vocabulary which is derived from unknown languages, and to trace the history that led to the formation of a single language from different ones.

[Massimiliano B]

In the last two days I have decided to change the grammatical structure of Tunuvaa language. I want it to be an isolating language. I will get my inspiration from Vietnamese language. So, all the words are uninflected. The words given in the vocabulary list don't undergo any change.